From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,a3bf872bb81a1f2b X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-12-09 11:08:52 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!ppp-2-47.cvx6.telinco.NET!not-for-mail From: "Nick Roberts" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: ASCL a doomed idea? Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 19:07:05 -0000 Message-ID: <9v0crv$bo2bi$2@ID-25716.news.dfncis.de> References: <7RQP7.4406$Yy.272014@rwcrnsc53> NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp-2-47.cvx6.telinco.net (212.1.135.47) X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1007924928 12323186 212.1.135.47 (16 [25716]) X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:17649 Date: 2001-12-09T19:07:05+00:00 List-Id: "Mark Lundquist" wrote in message news:7RQP7.4406$Yy.272014@rwcrnsc53... > > "Michael Erdmann" wrote in message > news:mailman.1007670662.18290.comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org... > > > > But as long i can remeber this there is a dicussion about > > basic containers going on which is find quite useless and > > which does not help to reach the project objective. > > The objective of which project, would that be? :-) > > If yours, then it should not be suprising if some other project does not > help to advance your objective :-) > > Not that there is necessarily anything wrong with your project/objective. I see that Michael has been busy in (at least) the areas of Ada database interfacing and a project called ACDE, which is about providing components for building distributed software. Respect. I see also references to 'ASCL', but I'm not sure whether this is an old name for ACDE or not, or whether it is currently extant. Regardless of this, I have thought of a possible alternative name for the STL-like containers project (effectively) started by TED: "Tenet", from the Latin "it holds". I think this has the requisite short-and-pithy-ness, and I don't think it's been used in an Ada context before. It does contain the word "net", however, so maybe it's not ideal. Does this name tickle anyone's ticklish bits, at all? I've been looking carefully at my proposal (NJR 5), Jeffrey Carter's (JC01) and TED's (1.3), and -- to put it totally bluntly -- I still think mine is the best so far (I just can't help being perfect ;-) for some fairly specific reasons: (1) all my nomenclature is derived directly from Ada.Strings.* wherever possible, the exceptions being 'cursor', 'cursorage', 'facing', 'prepend', 'split', 'move_cursor', and 'restart' (about which nobody seems to have argued anyway), and the generic parameter Element_Type, and the function End_of_*, both of which I have derived from Ada.*_IO; (2) there are certainly a lot of operations, but (and I have them reviewed carefully) I believe every single one is justified (including the array ones), either for reasons of implementational efficiency, or significant user convenience, or both; (3) the closed (passive?) iterator included in both JC01 and TED 1.3 is inferior to the open, container-wide iterator (I have already outlined, haven't I?) to be added to my proposal, in that it does not permit restarting within the client procedure, and it does not permit writing at all. Having reviewed my design, I have decided not to axe any of the operations, but to axe two of the parameters: Facing and Offset (except in Move_Cursor). The complete functionality of the Facing parameter can be reproduced by implementing a 'smart reverse' operation (so that's two further subprograms to be added!) with the appropriate semantics. I feel the Offset parameter (of the cursor-based operations) was overkill, given that you can always move the cursor to the required position, and then move it back again. Yet another procedure that needs to be added is a Copy_Cursor. I have rejected the idea of a separate cursor type (as pointless). I'm afraid I must say I've been a bit unimpressed about the recent arguments about the names of the ends of lists. I feel just like Gulliver witnessing, with incredulity, the arguments between the Lilliputians and the Blefuscuans about which end of the egg to eat first. Get it together guys, or I'm afraid Michael's prediction will come true, and I will indeed simply go off and do it on my own. -- Sternly, Nick Roberts